On Aug. 6, during the most dogged soccer match at the London Olympics, Megan Rapinoe blasted two shots past the Canadian goalie to help Team USA secure a spot in Thursday’s final. Even more impressive, however, may have been Rapinoe’s resolve when she came out as a lesbian just weeks before the Olympics. “I feel like sports in general are still homophobic,” she said in an interview with Out.com on July 5. “People want — they need — to see that there are people like me playing soccer for the good ol’ U.S. of A.”

In the high-profile world of Olympic competition, Rapinoe is among a small but growing number of gay athletes who have publicly acknowledged their sexual orientation. According to Outsports, a media-watchdog and sports-news site, of the 14,690 athletes participating in the Olympic and Paralympic Games this year, only 23 are openly gay. That’s around 0.16%. Even so, it’s a big improvement over the 2004 Games in Athens, which counted just 11 out athletes. In Beijing in 2008 there were only 10.

Their reasons for keeping a low profile vary, but closeted Olympians share one thing in common: they have trained their entire lives to represent their countries at the Games. Coming out, they fear, could cause sponsors to pull out of deals, and negative stereotypes may leave coaches and teammates questioning their abilities. “The most important thing to every athlete is their position and standing,” says Blake Skjellerup, a gay speedskater who represented New Zealand at the 2010 Winter Olympics. “They wouldn’t want anything as trivial as their sexuality to jeopardize that.”

The organizers behind Pride House — “a welcoming space for all athletes, staff, spectators and friends” — hope to show that being gay and being competitive aren’t incompatible. To that end, they have held informal gatherings like a recent 5-km run, are staging an exhibition on gay athletes and provide a space for athletes and nonathletes alike to watch the Olympics. “We’re putting a little flag in the sand and saying that within this environment, which isn’t inclusive and welcoming, we are an inclusive and welcoming space,” says Louise Englefield, the founding director of Pride Sports, an LGBT sports-development and equality organization. “If that means that people realize there is an alternative, then great.”

The inaugural Pride House at the Vancouver Games played a big role in Skjellerup’s coming out. Although he had told his family ahead of the Olympics, he had not contemplated coming out publicly. He sat at a Starbucks opposite the house before deciding to step inside. After strolling through a photo exhibition of gay athletes — including Olympic gold medalists like Greg Louganis and Matt Mitcham — he soon found himself telling staff members his secret. “It was quite a big thing, coming out to strangers,” he says. “I felt really good with myself after doing that.”

Coming out seems more daunting for male athletes. Of the 23 out Olympians this year, only four are men. “Constructions of masculinity within sport are incredibly rigid,” says Englefield, who adds that the “macho environment” entrenches homophobia. It’s a different story for gay women, she notes: “Lesbians who maybe don’t conform to heterosexual stereotypes of femininity can just get on with it and be themselves.”

No gay athlete, closeted or out, wants to hear homophobic slurs bandied about in the locker room. And yet having to fight against more than just your opponent may partly explain the success of openly gay sportsmen and sportswomen at the Olympics. “When you’re closeted, it’s quite hard on you mentally,” says Skjellerup. “But there is a lot of mental toughness that comes with being an athlete. For me, homophobic comments actually spear me on and encourage me more.”

He may not be alone. Outsports has identified 104 out athletes who have participated in Summer Games. More than half of them have won Olympic medals. Gay men and lesbians seem poised for similar success in London. Equestrian Carl Hester, as part of the British dressage team, became the first out athlete to win gold in this Olympics. Other notables include German Judith Arndt, who bagged a silver in cycling, and American Lisa Raymond, who walked off the tennis court with a bronze. Other likely medalists include Seimone Augustus, a star of the U.S. women’s basketball team; Rapinoe of the U.S. soccer squad; and four members of Holland’s field-hockey team.

But the biggest rewards have nothing to do with medals. In the week before Karen Hultzer, a 46-year-old archer from South Africa, competed at the Olympics, journalists began to chatter online that she might be gay. Although she had always lived her life openly among friends and family, she had never publicly acknowledged that she was a lesbian. That changed on July 30, shortly after she was eliminated from archery. “I am an archer, middle-aged and a lesbian,” she said in a statement. “I am also cranky before my first cup of coffee. None of these aspects define who I am, they are simply part of me.”

Hultzer doesn’t see herself as a trailblazer. But having visited Pride House and spoken with several journalists about her sexual orientation, it’s clear she sees the benefits of speaking up. “People aren’t out, and people don’t speak openly, so people don’t realize how many gay people there are,” she tells TIME. “They’re everybody. Your waitress at the bar, your nurse, the guy who drives your train.” And thanks to Hultzer, Skjellerup, Rapinoe and others, they’re your Olympians too.

That 23 out of 14,690 sporters are declared homosexuals is a VERY low figure from any point of view. How can anyone not acknowledge that? Those stats basically say: there are no gay top sporters. In a world were politicians, scientists, musicians, and artists are generally encouraged (and admired) for coming out of the closet, why should it be such a big deal for sporters?

I think we should apply some type of PC approach to US Olympic teams regardless of the outcome. After all, the rest of our entire society has been perverted by the endless diatribes proselyting equality at all costs. Why not subject the Olympics to the same biased and distorted version of "reality". Once that occurs maybe even the most die-hard among the self-serving, self-absorbed left will finally see how they have destroyed in a generation what has taken thousands of years to evolve normally and naturally.

Well, you spelt 'diatribe' right, but you got 'proselytizing' wrong. Try using Google as a spell-checker.

Normally and naturally, huh? Does that include witch burnings and the 'rule of thumb'? I'll bet that you think that society started going to Hell in a handbasket the minute they allowed women to get the vote... and stopped chopping off the left hand of thieves.

The only perversion I see here is someone who is so desperate to hold onto their sick cultural hegemony that they would be happy to regress to the barbarism of a previous age.

I always know I'm on track when the only factual response to a post deals with a typo and a litany of erroneous assumptions of what I believe; nothing regarding the actual post, just a rant. Not sure what my comments had to do with our legal system but I have to think even someone apparently as dimwitted as you surely realize it has failed us as a society when victims’ relatives routinely die of old age before punishments are invoked. Allow me to illustrate in a way that even you may understand. Imagine you are walking through a remote area of the world and happen upon a village. In that village you see a man caged. When asked why he is there you are told 25 years ago he killed someone and the leaders of the tribe are still determining his final punishment. Get it moron - kind of ignorant don't you think. Coming from someone whose family has as a matter of routine paid off both politicians and judges I can assure you that you are too naive to realize that our system has been bastardized by those who are the conduits of that system; the attorneys and judges. When outcomes are more a function of money and color justice has long ago been forgotten. Jennifer I haven’t been to church in more than 30 years and truly doubt the existence of a God so your reference to me supporting witch burnings is as inaccurate as the rest of your banal drivel. Unlike most supposedly "tolerant" liberals however I do feel people should have the right to do what they feel if that practice gives them comfort in some way. I am sure being religious doesn't necessarily require that you support the thought of witch burning anymore than being a gay male requires you enjoy fisting - maybe you could clarify however for those of us who are less enlightened on such matters. What most libs have never stopped to think about or are too wrapped up in their own interests to admit is that the very word they wear on their banner, i.e. “tolerance”, is something they only want to apply to others. In what world does tolerance only mean supporting the rights and beliefs of others as long as they agree with you - the gay world? It must take an iron will with the viscosity of melted butter to go out on a limb and support only that which you believe. But then again, I rarely hear the word bravery associated with the panty waist crowd but I’m sure you’ll point to some isolated incident that is supposed to carry the equal weight of the millions which have occurred in the straight world. Not sure what homosexuality has to do with society’s progression particularly when it was openly practiced 1,000’s of years ago. But hey, don’t let those thick history books get in the way of your edumacation. You poser pseudo-intellectual types always fall short in your rants. Case in point – earlier I used a reflexive pronoun just so you could demonstrate your prowess of the English language. Maybe you could be so kind as to point that out for others. Maybe you can use that Google thingy to help you figure it out. Oh, BTW, how was my spelling?

Why would you be asking the question? Why would anyone else even care? Do gay people compete differently? Why don't you ask the athletes what color underwear they use? How about asking how many people taking part in the games wear false teeth? Why not ask them what their favorite sexual fantasy is? Who is their favorite movie star?

The answers? It's nobody's business but their's, and none of it has anything to do with the Olympics.

I just checked the top of the page to see if hadn't mistakenly connected to "National Enquirer" That rag is full of nonsense like this.

A lot of the responses here seem to ask variations of the question, "it's a personal thing, why talk about it?" I think to answer that question you have to look to the athletes' motivation for coming out in the first place. Rapinoe and Skjellerup, based on their stories, certainly consider it a risk to come out. So why did they do it? While I'm not gay, I have to imagine their decision is based on having grown up in a culture that makes it very difficult to be LGBT. People who follow the news will certainly be familiar with the high suicide rate of homosexual teens, or even teens who aren't but are perceived to be. These athletes are in a position to show children growing up under those circumstances that they can be successful and admired regardless of their sexuality. They are taking a significant risk to do that. Is that not a worthy reason for coming out and for reporting on the matter? It seems heartless to conclude otherwise.

Now you've done it. There will be protests against London, NBC and past Olympic Champions. Either a certain percent of the athletes declare their preference for the same sex or we will stop these filthy games!

What the heck kind of a story is this ? Is your editor in chief out to lunch ? As others have said in previous posts sexual preferences do not have to be publicized. I'll bet this writer will not eat at Chick-fil-A either. You have Henry and Clare Luce turning over in their graves.

It may be that Olympians focus their lives on sports achievement and little time on the politics of sexuality. Like most people, they don't have the need to flaunt their sexuality to prove their worth.

Ironic for someone apparently in support of gay lifestyles using the word "nasty". You might want to spend some time observing in the health care system. In less than a week you will realize gay sex among men is the single nastiest thing two humans willingly do together and the repercussions are proof.

@robt55: Just because an act of love might be repellent to you does not mean that "gay sex among men is the single nastiest thing two humans willingly do together". I happen to think sex between straight people is disgusting, but then again, I prefer not to think about what other people do in their bedrooms. It's none of my business. Grow up, for heaven's sake.

Well robt55, I have worked for 20 years in ICU/CCU and emergency departments and you know what! Gay men do not go there to have sex. Whatever consenting adults choose to do is up to them. I used nasty as in society and you have just given a demonstration think that homosexual people are nasty. Personally, I think your sexuality is a private afair and no ones business. I admire their atheletic ability and devotion to their sport.

Right. The correct response is a) ignore it and pretend it doesn't exist; or b) preach old-testament biblical laws and pray for a stoning. Sheesh. About 5 % of your neighbors are gay. Get over it. It is no more significant than left-handed and blue-eyed. We are what God made us.

Respectfully, I don't agree. Homosexual practice, just like heterosexual, bisexual, abstinence and so on are choices that people make. We all have leanings, predilections, lusts, aversions, dispositions, and occasionally common sense. Some of these feelings may be very strong and innate. Others are occasional, temporary, and peripheral. And one doesn't have to hate "gay" people to agree with the common historical view of most cultures, religions, and legal systems over the past 4,000 years. The GLBT movement must paint any contradiction to their view as a lack of tolerance and as hate. It presents gay rights as civil right and human rights. This is not only wrong, but illogical. It's proponents have worked hard to avoid a discussion on the merits, but through intimidation, vitriolic, and misrepresentation of the issues to outshout the opposition under an all encompasing banner of diversity. This is another form of the big lie. It overstates the participants while understating the consequences. It must insist that same-sex orientation and practice is just an acceptable variation, natural, and normal. The truth is it is neither of these.

The results: harm to reasoned discussion, harm to the culture, harm to families, harm to children, and harm to those who are taught that whatever their sexual desire, as long as it is between consenting adults (for now), they not only can, but should own and indulge their basest predilections. And this should define them? How corrupt and devastating to the soul. For those willing to consider it, their is a another way, a better way. "And you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free."

The only reason this should be an issue is if discrimination is involved by the IOC. Each country has to deal with it their own way before then. Some will never use gay (as far as they know) athletes and some will.

I don't hear announcers during events saying "Here is John Smith, the straight swimmer from..." or "Jane Smith, the gay leader in the 200 meter...".

I have to think that there are many who simply don't care. Most fans can't even name an athletes spouse and they just don't care.

Until sexual intercourse is made an Olympic event (and it arguably is the only thing that hasn't been proposed), what difference should it make to the public what an Olympic athlete's sexual preference may or may not be? It has no bearing on athletic performance, and it's a question the rest of us should not ask. It's no one's business unless the athlete chooses to make it everyone's business.

The reason is that most countries don't take very kindly to that sort of behavior. While the Western World may be (partially) changing (mostly in Europe, Canada, and possibly Australia/New Zealand), most of Asia and Africa has not budged an inch in their views, especially Islamic countries.